*DAMN R6 Forum

Let the people who play the game decide it's fate...

we had that discussion this year already but, w/e.

A decision made a year ago should be readdressed by the current community.  It seems that there is still discontent with the current system and in the ambivalence of the DAMB BL Staff. 

I don't think theres any ambivalence with the DBL Staff at the moment , i've not been aware of people being unhappy with the current set up (certainly nothing has been said on the forums for a long long time)  and when this kind of topic has been raised in the past the overall majority of the community has been dead set against alterations to the GL or sensors kits.

I think slowing the GL fire rate down would be great.
But still, the gl would overrule frags. That's why I suggest to increase the number of frags to like 10 as well.

This is a game, if your looking for realism go join the army.  You might as well go back and fix the accuracy, zoom and rate of fire on every gun if you want realism.

Or play America's Army. ;D

woooooooo yea!

It's not about realism, per se, it's about balancing the various weapons.  I don't think you'll find anyone (except yourself) who doesn't think the OICW GL has an unfair advantage on some maps.  On top of that, the GL contributes an enormous amount of lag.  I forgot to mention that spawn kills are BS also.

how can a weapon be unfair if everyone is able to pick it? if you think you get an advantage with GL then why dont you just pick it?

Exactly, and hand grenades don't have a better advantage than the GL?  Hand grenades you can toss over walls on any map and kill someone, just depends on wether your good at it or suck ass.

P.S.  It's not our fault that people have gotten good at using the GL, we shouldn't have to dumb it down for the noobs.

If the problem is that people have gotten too good at the GL, then slowing the rate of fire wouldn't matter, as they wouldn't need to spam to hit their targets.  If you're really good at the GL, you don't need the high rate of fire.  The only thing that the high rate of fire facilitates is one's inaccuracy with the grenade launcher.

who said it had anything to do with realism?.. other than you that is.

Is it our fault that you can't find a better way to defend a grenade launcher?  Yea lets reduce the rate of fire so the people that can't figure out how to defend it at least have a better chance.  Let's completely change the game so its nothing like the game the creators intended it to be, and hell why not give the pistol a zoom so when I take a sniper rifle I have a fair chance against a rifle.

The rate of fire on the SA80 is too low, we should make that a little higher, and their should be a fully automatic sniper rifle, with a 3 round burst and low stabilization time, that way people that take sniper rifles have a better chance against those with rifles.  The MG3 should have a lower rate of fire so people aren't bitching about lag, and maybe give it a good zoom just for the hell of it.

   Lol, dude, it has nothing to do with defending a grenade launcher, if you put yourself in a position where you are vulnerable to the grenade launcher, then you are vulnerable to the grenade launcher no matter what the rate of fire is on it.  It only takes one grenade to kill somebody.  It simply means that a person can't just spam a shitload of grenades to compensate for their own innacuracy with the grenade launcher.  If that person is going to make a kill with a gl that has a lower rate of fire, they have to be accurate with it.  That is all it affects.


Punisher, it has nothing to do with changing the game from what the game makers wanted it to be that you are taking objection to.  If that was the case, then you wouldn't be a strong advocate of warzone which, as it doesn't take any considerable measure of intelligence to comprehend, changes Ghost Recon in a much more drastic fashion than what lowering the rate of fire on the grenade launcher would do.


There is a difference Punisher, there is not a significant body of people who are displeased with the rate of fire on the SA80, nor the current array of sniper rifles.  Nobody feels that they have a significant adverse affect upon GHR gameplay.

Call me crazy but, I would much rather launch six nades into somebodies face than just one... leave the game be.

Waste of a post, no points made or developed whatsoever apart from, I like to spam.

Nice waste of a post, posting information telling someone else that their post is a waste of a post!

Looks like leaving the *DBL the way it is has gotten the most votes, thus eliminating any further conversation to change it.

No, because my posting that someone else's post is wasted prevents them from introducing such useless crap into a logical discussion in the future.  Your posts btw, have almost all been such.  I've logically shut down every single point you tried to advance thus far, as displayed through your inability to counter-argue any of my rebuttals.  That's great the people have voted against change, by a current margin of 12-10, yet nobody has been able to forward a logical reason to counter the proposition for change, what does that indicate?... that the people voting against it are the people on here like cO.luna who have nothing constructive to say apart from, I like nade spamming.

I honestly haven't heard of any complaints about *DBL Warzone until you came along.
You can bitch, complain or do whatever you want, the fact of the matter is that *DBL Warzone isn't going to change just because a few people think it should, your wasting your time.  Same goes for slowing the GL.

I agree 100% with this statement.  It couldnt have been said better.

Uhmmm, crap! I agree 100 % with what Kit said about what Punisher said.... ::lol::

Damn, I guess I'm the only person that thought eliminating sensors was a good idea!  And you guys used to call ME a camper!  ha![/size]  ;)

Actually, I was torn between eliminating sensors and not... But it is so fun using them and destroying them in a CB... I did not want to eliminate that. 

First off, I voted for not slowing the rate of fire. Someone made a point that if you are skilled with the gl, you would not need to have to fire grenades at a fast rate due to the first nade hitting your target. While this may hold true for ONE target, what happens when multiple targets appear and you're stuck furiously clicking in hopes that the next gl round kicks in before the second guy takes you out? You die.

You can make the counterpoint that hand nades, claymores, and rockets have this same delay as secondary weapons. I believe a good reason for this is that you are generally out of view or far away when employing these weapons, whereas the grenade launcher is used in both long distance and close combat.

This is how I see it. The hig rof of the gl is similar to the rof of the guns in ghr. Why do some people use burst or full-auto? Because we're not always perfect shots. A reflex-driven, not very well aimed three round burst is much more likely to hit a target than one not very well aimed bullet. Should we also switch guns so that they only fire one bullet per second? I mean... if you're good, you only will need one.

First off, It's nice to see somebody actually take the time to respond to a point and counter with a developed point of their own.  Thankyou for actually contributing.


   Well for one, the transition between the grenade launcher and your rifle is practically instant.  Unlike hand grenades, sensors etc. that take a considerable ammount of time to put away and regain control of your rifle, you always have the option with the gl to return to your rifle and shoot the person.  That is why many people who use the GL, when they spot somebody, instead of shooting them, they quickly switch to their GL and nade them instead, because the transition is quicker than waiting for your reticule to close, and the kill is a greater likelihood.  You don't need to be clicking furiously hoping a nade is ready to fire when you can siwtch back to your rifle and be firing in a few tenths of a second.

    Also, that would only really apply if the grenade launcher was slowed down to less than a shot per second.  The current rate of fire on the OICW GL is 600 rounds per minute, taking it down to around 90 shots per minute would mean you could fire a nade once every 0.75 seconds.  If you can no longer spam and have to be relatively accurate with the OICW GL, 3/4 of a second is about the time it takes to re-aim for a second target and fire.  Go into your Ghost Recon>Ghost Recon Data>Mods>Origmiss>Equip>glforoicw.gun  and where it says  <SelectiveOption RateOfFire = "600" RoundsPerPull = "1" StartSound = "w_gp25_ss.wav"/>  change the 600 to 90 and test it out.  That's all I'd like to see it slowed to at the most.


You can not compare 20mmHE rounds to regular FMJ rounds.  One, you have to actually hit your target, one you just have to come within 7 units of your target (a hand frag has a range of 10 in comparison).  If there were bullets in ghost recon that were 7 units radius, then yes, full auto would become a huge problem. ; however, that is not the case, and full auto as a result has as many downsides as it does upsides.  At long range, it is much less effective than single shot, the same goes for three shot burst.  They are close range options exclusively, every firing rate has its advantages as well as significant disadvantages.  The same conditions do not exist for the OICW GL.  Not to mention that the majority of kills are still made on single shot.

Basically, all the problems with the OICW GL come down to corner screen, long range nading.  Not only does it give you the ability to kill a target to whom you are out range, but it makes it noobishly easy.  All you have to do is spot his general location, and you can launch a volley that will cover an obscenely large surface area.  The whole problem with the GL is the ability to look beyond the haze with corner screens.  Slowing the rate of fire down to a nade every 3/4 of a second, or 2 per second even, would render the GL a highly advantageous weapon still in almost all of the same scenarios as before, the only one it would significantly affect is its ability to long range nade without the need to be accurate.

Personally, I think it could have been said better if it was relevant to the discussion.  This isn't about realism, nor is anybody in the post saying it is.  His response, was a response to, well, nobody.  Just a wasted post.

Or you can present a logical sequence to show why it should logically be amended.  One that you tried to break and got shut down many times over before resorting to these kinds of arguments when you realized you had no chance in trying to discuss the actual points.

Fridge stop playing God with the forums telling everyone whos right and whos wrong.

I don't just say you're wrong to anybody, I develop and support everything I say, and you're always free to counter-argue any of it if you can do so, which you haven't been able to do.  Generally when you're incapable to counter argue a point btw, it's because that point is valid.

"The BL is fine the way it is" has won on the fucking poll.  Good riddance to all the BL haters, have fun talking amongst yourselves! 

YOU CAN'T MAKE A MORE VALID POINT THAN VOTING!!!

(http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/1569/emperor121uq.jpg)

"Your fleet has lost, and your friends up there on the endor moon will not survive."

Yes punisher, that's a brilliant notion.  Like when the people suggested the world was round and everybody laughed, the people who were saying that it was round were wrong because the majority didn't grasp their argument... right?.. oh, oh wait.

Yep thats why when people run for president the one with the least votes gets elected, right?

and this has what to do with the dbl? stop bickering eh?

Actually, yeah, it's true, the vote is decisive, I'll give you that, and so the GL stays the same.

It's just frustrating that so many people can vote no, and yet not one of them can forward a reasonable explanation as to why.  I guess what it comes down to is the fact that GL spamming has become such a big part of their game that the thought of reducing its effectiveness reduces the effectiveness of their game, and so naturally they will always vote no, regardless of what you throw at them.  People just don't like anything that proposes to make their ability to kill somebody in GHR harder, and so they vote primarily based on how it will affect themselves rather than how it will affect the game and the DAMN BL in an overall sense. The fact that nobody has been able to forward any solid argument as to why changing the GL rate of fire would adversely affect ghost recon indicates that people are voting no based on this fact.

I think they just voted no because you are being a dick.

Sure, I'm a dick.

On topic gentleman. - Haz

http://www.damnr6.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=9985.20


Kitkat, mate ....
I voted yes to slowing the gl down, spammers just kill the game, it's obvious.

whoa, a fight on *DAMN I'm not a part of?

Ghost Recon was made the way it was made for a reason.  People are constantly trying to change the game to make it better... just play the damn game, for once, just play it.  Every player here has the same opportunities on the battlefield as the next guy.

Counter this all you want... just know before you do so that I'm right and you're wrong. ;)

Good for you Clay.  Nothing wrong with voting the way you want.  I voted no because I like Ghost Recon just the way the programmers made it. 

When GhR 2 (or 3 or GRAW or whatever) comes out for the Mac I will buy that and play that the way the Software Engineers made it too.

Hopefully it will be a good game so that all this crap being repeatedly discussed will melt away since there will be a new game to play.

I voted no cause I like the gl the way it is, it's a fun gun.
My favorite is when I catch a enemy from behind, or a blind side and I let off all 6 gls into their head...knowing that one would be enough...I guess i just like the sound, and I like blowing shit up.

Here's to blowing shit up!

Cheers!

Loving to FUBAR someone is an inherent right amongst GhR players, but you can still do that with a slowed down GL.

Oh well, it seems that this topic will not change either because people have become reliant on spamming spawns, spamming to offset accuracy, or spamming for the sheer thrill of carpet bombing someone.

It's a shame the GhR community won't agree to slow the rate of fire to  minimize spawn spamming, to minimze GL-induced lag, and to promote accuracy over volume of ammo used.

I voted no as well... Personally I hate the oicw/gl. I hardly ever use the thing. I hate spammers and I hate the tks it causes on my part but removing it or slowing its rate would be like removing a large part of the game and how the game is played for me. As said before, to even the playing fielf, each team could have a person on gl and I have yet to be in a cb where at least one player did not take the gl each round. It is just a smart idea. To avoid being spammed, sacrifice running straight for the wz and take cover if you are in a spammable spawn.

To link this to RvS... On half the maps, you can usually spam someone with frags right off the bat if you know where to aim. The same applies for the gl. I don't think the gl should be removed from ghr any more than frags should be removed from rvs. They are part of the game. Learn to deal with them or come up with a strategy to avoid them.

Ein

Very true Weed. it would have been nice to at least tried it out on 1 Season. Personally I have given up on suggesting anything on DBL. Same ole same ole.

I think I'll give up trying to change anything on BL.  Everyone is scared a change will affect their position within the player community.   ::wall::

I dont think thats true weed.  This poll was rigged to fail because the 3 choices for changing the BL will have a lower percentage (because its 3 choices!!)  But if you look at it a different way currently it is pretty close.... 14 for changing it and 15 for not changing it.

Edit...  Make that 14 for changing and 16 for not...  Someone just voted.

And thats the problem. Anyone can vote. None-players just to screw ideas.

An even bigger problem would be that nobody votes... we have way more that 30 active ghr players in the league.

I for one use the noobstick often... very often..... but seldom do I spam with it. I admit I do resort to spamming at times, but most of the time, I surgically nade my targets and feel great when I get a kill (or 2) with just 1 nade.... I take pride in it!

I love the rush I get in some maps where I know "what's coming"... and have to hurry my ass to get out of the way of other spammers... such as when I spawn in the SouthEast of Ghost Town.... I know there's not much time to get out of the way of the wave of nades some opponents will send in our direction... But I love that shit! I love that challenge... There is as much skill in evading the nade spamming as there is in surgically nading.... By now, I have developed a "timing" for both.... I know where and when to run in order t avoid falling prey of a blind nade that has been sent to a specific point in the map where usually peeps run to... I mean, come on, If by now you dont know where the spamming nade points are in maps such as Ghost Town, Red Square, Downtown, etc then you need to do your homework! - This doesn't mean I don't get killed at times by it, heck I die and often! but you will never hear me complaint for it! By now, I accept it as part of the game....

Since you like analogies, here's mine: - I love women's breast nice and perky... but preferably "natural".... just like the creator intended it to be... I have nothing against "breast enhancement" either.. i think it's awesome.... but I would prefer a natural one....Same applies to GhR.... The game was created this way, people have learned to play with what's given. Aside from your cool map mods, etc... The weapons should remain as intended by the game creators.......The fact is that there will always be better players than others; twisting things in your favor by seeking changes that adjust the game's original settings to better fit your camping-ass-sniping-playing style, is not cool! -  The inconformist, the weak, the vulnerable - will always "howl to the moon".

   Change is good, as long as it is not to favor the few, the unproud, the... u get my point; in detriment of the majority.

Let it rest now! But since you like "presidential analogies", why don't you try it again in about,say, 4 years!

I howl at nothing.

 ::lol::

Ghost Recon has been out for 5 years now?  And people want to remove GL's and sensors? It would change the way most of the veterans of GhR play the game.  Its not like sensors and GL were added in a map pack or something. PLus gl "spammer" have 12 nades...most of those guys are empty within the first 15 seconds of the match, and are left with a gun with limited zoom.  Personally I don't like getting spammed and I hardly ever use it, but it is a good tool to have in the squad tactically.  And how do you expect KitKat to get any kills if you take away his OICW/GL?  ;D  JK KK -Plus if another DBL map pack has to come out, you may not see another season for a few months.  This is the game people ... love it or leave it.

Can I see another choice in the poll? 

5. Leave the kits alone. THere are other issues that need to be attended too.

Actually, the OICW rifle has the best zoom of any rifles short of a sniper rifle.  I think the zoom=5 on the .gun file.  I can check when I get home but I think that's correct.  The only limitation of the OICW rifle is it's slightly slower reticule when compared to the SA80, for example.

Oh contrare my good friend.... the OICW GL's Rifle has less of a zoom than if you took it without the GL.

You make it sound like the zoom of the OICW rifle changes based on the secondary kit.  If you look at the .gun files within your Ghost Recon data folder you'll see the OICW has a higher number rating for the zoom which equates to more zoom.  The OICW zoom is the best zoom on any assault rifle, SMG, or support kit.  I think the OICW rifle zoom is rated as a 5, an SA80 is a 4, and an M-9 is a 1 for comparison reasons.  I can copy and paste the specific numbers in here but you are 100% wrong on this one :)

The really sad part about that Cell is its true...  My first reflex when i see an enemy is to switch to GL... lol   ::wall::

Ok, here is a screenshot of the m9 (worst zoom) vs the OICW rifle.  The higher the bottom zoom number, the better.

http://mysite.verizon.net/craigminah/oicwzoom.jpg

 Weed...I always thought that's the payoff..OICW/GL  Less zoom/auto nades --    OICW Regular/Sensors more zoom....anyway, that's the way I always remembered playing with it. Is that zoom number the same for it with and without gl?

Weed, are you saying that the zoom on the OICW/GL and the OICW w/ sensors are the same? If you are, then you my friend are 100% wrong :)....the OICW w/ sensors has alot more zoom than the OICW/GL.  Anyone that takes both of these kits on a regular basis knows that.

Edit -There is an OICWGL.gun file...the zoom is 3, compared to the oicw.gun, which is 5.

i think i'm dreaming !! I 'm right now agreeing with puni !!! maybe i'm seek ?? ho ya i'm seek bastard !!!

so lets leave it the way it is, its fun and when its no more fun there is other games

Hmmm...never noticed...guess you're only 50% wrong and so was I...thanks.

dont u guys think that these polls should be voted only with the votes of each clan, cause if i ask all my members to vote one or the other i will have more weight than some other clans !!!!!

any way it would be a low move and i'm not for such stupid trics !! that some clans could use to enforce a rule or a ruling, isnt it!!

aproximatively 25 votes with 16 active players in ghr

What is it that we were wrong about?  You're the only one that posted a false statement on here (on this matter, of course)...It's ok to accept the fact that you quickly jumped to conclusions, and were wrong.